hahaha… half the kexts in there are not needed and obselete for the system dsdt’s they package … if they were modified correctly. It would be easy for us to do an installer that’s way better and release it for free… bye bye p$y$tar profits.

Its easy to fight their PR machine, Rebel EFI its in many news sites that allow comments to be posted, so post there and publizice the fact they are:
– Using APSL & GPL code.
– Wrapping it around in encrypted form.
– Not publishing the source code.
That would do something

[…] Netkas made a good point today on the evidences that concludes the PY$TAR ripped boot-132 and other great things. If you’ve the time , I would recommend you to read the translated version or get someone who speaks Russian to do the translation for you. […]

Why would anyone here be concerned with Psystar making a profit?
Their small market is non technical people who don’t want to or can’t afford to buy Apple hardware, not us.
If you use OpenHaltRestart.kext or RealtekR1000.kext, you are benefiting from Psystar’s work.
They have made RealtekR1000 version 1.8.1 open source, but unfortunately not the latest 2.0.9 version that automatically sets built-in=true.
Their OpenAHCI.kext showed me the device-id value I needed to add to IDE1 to correctly show Intel ICH10 AHCI in the System Profiler’s Serial-ATA section on my GA-EX58.

@d00d
Are you kidding me??? Because they are making profit using an open source product made for free by people who have also a real life outside osx86 world. RESPECT please. You wouldn’t even run vanilla kernel without efi emulation.
The only useful thing they made is openhaltrestart, all rest you mentioned can be fixed through dsdt. Anyway would you really compare the contribute they brought with ohr with what people like netkas, zef or dfe has done for the community?

@a|e§: They profit from open source, but give back with the source to OpenHaltRestart and RealtekR1000 (but not yet with the latest versions).
Show me your DSDT only solution for the GA-EX58’s RTC8111D.
Using realtek’s problematic RTGNICv2.0.3.pkg’s AppleRTL8169Ethernet.kext doesn’t count.
Reread what I wrote, I never made a comparison between their contributions and others.

@d00d
What makes their way of acting really a shame is mainly the fact that they sell something that doesnt belong to them. That’s all. Worse ? Sure, they don’t even mention the name of original programers who made the kext they use in the program they sell. Worse ?? SURE, they even ERASED the names of the programers into these kexts… OK, they brought us a usefull kext, for free, can’t deny it. Does it therefore give them the right to act this way, and to make money on other’s work ? Please try to answer that…

Are you realizing that they are selling a product which is based on the work of all the community, in particular on the work of the voodoo team, etc…
They have spend so much times to create, test and give the support for all the stuffs… FOR FREE!!!
And finally, they’ve not mentioned anywhere that they’ve used this or that, thanks to this team and this guy…

It’s not wrong to sell a product based on open-source code. What is wrong is not to share your product code back with the community. You guys really should read up on open source licensing. Psystar ‘stole’ nothing. They used freely available open sourced code – which they are allowed to do. It’s in the terms of the APSL and GPL. The only thing they have done ‘wrong’ is not to release the modified code. So the question is.. has anybody actually bothered to ask them to release it? I suspect not..

///they should distribute dubl with copy of APSL, but they doesnt, Mailed support@psystar.com asking for sources, got no answer, 2 breaking of APSL, not enough?

I find it funny that someone who encourages breaking the license of a company to run their software on unsupported hardware can throw stones at a company who takes source code to put a pretty face on that same software.

… and sell it. Stop provocation Nick. Nobody did encourage anyone “breaking the license” of The Company. Therefore, some people try to show what we can do with it. It is as simple as that. And the main thing is : the other company did not only take the source code, they SELL it ! And it’s got nothing to do with “who is worse”. So don’t try to push that way. No one cares, anyway…

EvO Team introduces you EvOReboot.
Tired of finding Psystar everytime we checked the IOREG, we decided to develope a new solution for Shutdown/Restart, EvOReboot it´s the replacement for Openhaltrestart from Psystar, it solves shutdown and restart problems under Snow Leopard.

I have a question – can this company possibly still do the right thing and try to get our open source community back on side? Perhaps by publicly apologising and properly crediting the original open source code then releasing their own efforts as open? (If they are not just a straight rip-off). I see no problem in charging for compiled efforts, if the source is also totally open. Most non-developers struggle to compile source, so if their product does anything considerably better (which I doubt!) than the freely available and compiled options like Boot-132/Chameleon/FakeSMC then they are entitled to charge for compiled binaries. I would even respect that, as long as the source is credited properly and totally open and available. Otherwise, they should be completely shunned and disowned from what is essentially a pro-Apple open movement. I like Apple and bought their operating system (and eventually hardware too) because of the efforts made by the very open hackintosh community but cannot see any benefit from what this company is doing, other than spotlighting the fact to Apple that there are many people out there wanting to run Apple’s excellent affordable alternative to Win7, which now comes with excellent applications, no activation faff, virus/malware concerns and minimal hardware/vendor driver bloatware.